| Author | Topic: Additive Synth Plug-in War | |||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 6th January 2004 09:32 | |||||||||
With the release of White noises Additive synth, There are finally some good contenders in the additive synth department along with Camel Audio and The Cube. I was curious which one has the most features. Maybe this group could help me decied. I'm lost, they all sound good. Thanks in advanced.
http://virsyn.com/en/E_Products/E_CUBE/e_cube.html http://www.whitenoiseaudio.com/additive/ http://www.camelaudio.com/index.htm Thomas | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 09:38 | |||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 09:49 | |||||||||
| bluedad | Posted: 6th January 2004 09:49 | |||||||||
Adder
from concretefx | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 09:52 | |||||||||
Both posted the same time I was wondering why the server had stalled again | ||||||||||
| bluedad | Posted: 6th January 2004 09:56 | |||||||||
yeah, me too!
| ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:10 | |||||||||
The last one seems weak. Only 32 partials. Besides I more curious to peoples opinions of the synths already mentioned. Thanks. I didn't know about Vertigo. Seems like a good contender. | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:13 | |||||||||
I did a review of the Camel one which sums up how I feel about it very well. If you find that useful give it a vote please Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| CypherOne | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:15 | |||||||||
just soooooo bitter Spe3d | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:16 | |||||||||
opinions , like mileage , may vary ...
best you download the demos , and make up your own mind ... | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:25 | |||||||||
I'm not looking at opinions of sound, more or less. I'm curious at techincal perspectives. Thanks | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:31 | |||||||||
There are a lot of things you dont know Cypher and that kind of comment does not help though I know you mean it only in jest.
Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:33 | |||||||||
re: technical perspectives ...
all the more reason to try the demos ... see what works well on your set-up ... as with all additives , CPU usage remains a concern ... btw ... with adder , despite the 32 partials , some rather amazing results can be achieved ... also , quite affordable ... me ... i do vertigo ... | ||||||||||
| pschelfh | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:36 | |||||||||
I've demo-ed Vertigo, Cameleon and Cube before deciding on Cameleon.
The thing that's nice about Cameleon and Vertigo is Resynthesis : extracting the frequencies of a waveform and using these as the basis of additive synthesis. Verigo's resynthesis is very nice, but at the expence of a high cpu-load. Cameleon is more picky about the sounds you resynthesize but I liked the GUI very much, very easy to use for such a complex synth, and it's easier on the cpu than Vertigo. You really need to take some time to explore these synths, they can go very deep into the heart of a sound! Just my opinion, Peter. | ||||||||||
| CypherOne | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:37 | |||||||||
 | ||||||||||
| dougsyo | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:38 | |||||||||
Adder allows partials to be saw, triangle, square and sample-based waves - not just sine waves. If I remember right (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm not  ), the "sliders" can cover multiple harmonics at once, and cover substantially more range than 32 partials in this fashion - it's more like "32 groups of partials".
I like the CFX synths, and I tried hard to get my head around this one during beta test period, and I just couldn't. It's very deep, but it was just going a different direction than I was at the time... and I start back to keyboard classes next week so my VA time will be somewhat limited for a while. Doug | ||||||||||
| Kriminal | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:43 | |||||||||
WhiteNoise is great, its the best of the bunch for me, and i have tried them all. | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:45 | |||||||||
I have the Cube but was conisdering Camel audio. But for the price the White Noise additive seems pretty close to camel's for a fraction of the price. Is there anything I would be missing.
Thomas p.s. why does "cyperone" keep posting stupid comments and smiles? Quit wasting space, please! | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:48 | |||||||||
I like WhiteNoise too in fact I done a website for the images that WhiteNoise can use here : http://www.dspevo.net/English/frames.html
You will also find Camel images there too maybe soon there will be more synths that offer this as an alternative form of sound input. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:52 | |||||||||
Vertigo2 does ... | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:53 | |||||||||
Yeah it is a close race between the two that can do the bit map thing. I haven't been able to do this on my pc. I have Metasynth for the mac and it is great, except it is more of a stand alone editor that can do some awsome synth sounds from picture files. Does camel offer more in features that the White noise as far as programming goes? I noticed white noies offers 128 partials as apposed to camel's 64. | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:55 | |||||||||
Cool stuff Normal have you got any specifications on the image type and size yet? I will be very happy to host and make images for it Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 10:57 | |||||||||
awaiting documents upon final release ...
i've used some of the images from your site ... they work ... | ||||||||||
| WhiteNoise | Posted: 6th January 2004 11:01 | |||||||||
White Noise Additive actually has 256 partials total if you count both oscs.
-Dave WNAS | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 11:04 | |||||||||
Which ones the colour or the greyscale? Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 11:14 | |||||||||
Ah! Yep! Dave, That kind of answers the question about Vertigo to my guess is it take images up to 256 pixels though I dont know by what. The duel osc is only part of WhiteNoise though you can also load images into the filter sections too. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 11:15 | |||||||||
actually ...
they both seem to work ... more investigation required ... | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 6th January 2004 11:18 | |||||||||
Thank you, Normal 
Great info indeed, I think I can put the bits together now it will be fun to see what the outcome will actually turn out though it sounds quite advanced. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Nuisances Sonores | Posted: 6th January 2004 11:21 | |||||||||
Just an info : Cube will be upgraded soon.
I was told one month + ago, no details how ... and I didn't ask ... " by year's end " so unless Harry was optimistic, met some problems, went way beyond plans, it should be soon ... I have to thoroughly test the additive gang, CA5000 hasn't gained his baseball bat so far, I must dig further I guess 
But now I'am like a pig who ate to much : " an another plate, sir ? " " no, thanks ... later, much digest ! " 
A really nice feeling though. | ||||||||||
| Ben [Camel Audio] | Posted: 6th January 2004 13:32 | |||||||||
Hi,
I've created a comparison chart, to compare Cameleon, Cube, Vertigo and WhiteNoise additive. Obviously, as the main creator of Cameleon, I am biased, however, I have tried to stick to the facts (for example, the fact that Vertigo is able to resynthesise loops better is noted). Overall, I think that Cameleon does stack up well in terms of features. http://www.camelaudio.com/additive_comparison.htm Also, see below the table for descriptions of each feature. If someone would like to do the CPU comparison, I would be very greatful. Obviously it is open to debate however, as it depends on the preset chosen - perhaps we should pick the most CPU heavy preset from each demo or something. Previously Cameleon has been praised for its CPU efficiency, so I think it should do well here. If you think there are any errors in the table, or you think it could be improved, please let me know. Either here, or via email at ben<at>camelaudio<dot>com. Obviously there is bound to be some subjectivity about which features are selected to be displayed, however, the prime reason I created this, was because a number of people have been unsure about how the products differ, and why various features are useful to them. Finally, I would encourage everyone to listen to the MP3 demos provided for each synth, as this does give some indication of the range of the full product. At the end of the day, you would do well to download the demos and try them for yourself, and make a judgement based on that. Thanks Ben | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 6th January 2004 13:47 | |||||||||
Very helpful, Thanks!! You should probably add number of oscilators and partials to the chart. As far as Cameleon 5000 and the abilitly to import images. Are they limited to black and white? Does this effect the sound differently then color? Is this feature in the demo? Thanks | ||||||||||
| WhiteNoise | Posted: 6th January 2004 13:51 | |||||||||
Hey Ben,
While I think the comparison chart is a good idea, I don't really think it's a fair comparison as you pick features that Chameleon has that other synths don't but ignore features that other synths have but Chameleon doesn't, making Chameleon look like it out-features all the others. Plus your wording precludes a fair comparison on some categories. For example, Noise/Harmonics/Separation is specific to your implementation of noise. Both Cube and Additive synth can do noise but in a different way. A more fair way might be "Noise:" "Yes - Separate per harmonic", "Yes - By spectrum", "no", etc.. While it's your site and you certainly can advertise your synth however you want, I wouldn't want people here to think that those were the only features worth comparing on. -Dave | ||||||||||
| Concretefx | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:06 | |||||||||
Hi there
I agree with whitenoise , it might be a bit like comparing oranges and apples. My synth Adder for instance wouldn't look very good if just look at the number of partials but because for instance it can use any wave rather than just sine waves to create sounds , it can do much more than a simple comparision would suggest Cheers Jon : ConcreteF | ||||||||||
| flametop | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:10 | |||||||||
The only war is against my credit card | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:30 | |||||||||
@ben ...
you'll need to re-examine the feature list for Vertigo , given the upgrades in the V2 beta ... you can add a check mark for morph timeline ... image import ... stretch ... | ||||||||||
| boin | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:31 | |||||||||
I'm not getting to the White Noise web site. Is it down or something? (' ') | ||||||||||
| Ben [Camel Audio] | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:37 | |||||||||
Hi,
OK - I will add number of partials. Currently you must use a utlity to convert images to voices. However, within a week there will be a version of Cameleon which will load sounds directly. Currently images must be gray scale, but I will make it support colour too. Both will essentially result in the same result - ie. the lighter the pixel, the louder that harmonics, at that time.
I agree that it is somewhat arbitrary what features are included in any comparison. I think you have made a great synth and all of the synths are good in their own right, and have different strengths and weaknesses. On the specific point of talking about noise generators, there is a line in the table which says 'Noise Generator', and there is indeed a 'x' beside your synth.
Your synth does sound interesting. I agree that no comparison can tell the whole story, and that people should try the demoes for themselves. What drove me to create this, was that people seemed to be a little confused about what some features did, and how they compared between synths. In addition, people seemed to assume that all additive synths were alike, and therefore only discriminate based on price. I wanted to highlight that there is more to it than that. Thanks Ben | ||||||||||
| baggio | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:39 | |||||||||
I have used and abused Cube, Cameleon, Vertigo and White Noize and they are all different beasts as far as I am concerned - they are good at doing different things. Most people own more than 1 subtractive synth so why not more than one additive synth - if you only want one then try the demos and make a choice on what is best for you. | ||||||||||
| floyd | Posted: 6th January 2004 14:55 | |||||||||
as for cpu % comparison, wouldn't it be best to resynth the same .wav in all of the synths, set the partials to the same baseline number (64 since Camel only uses that many I think) and tweak the parameters to close to the same? Seems more fair than choosing arbitrary presets. | ||||||||||
| ugo | Posted: 6th January 2004 15:47 | |||||||||
agreed. calling it a war makes it sound like there should only be one winner. but imho, they all sound different and they are all extremely cool. therefore they are all equally worth buying. question: if your funds are tight, which addtive vsti's should you buy? A. which ever make you feel the most creative. B. as many as you can! C. all the above the correct answer is C
-ugo (a fan of additive synthesis ever since the kawai K5000 was still in production.) | ||||||||||
| Nuisances Sonores | Posted: 6th January 2004 16:08 | |||||||||
I'd would prefer they would go their own way, their own sounds and definitely not meet on a fighting ground to see who has the fatest bag of partials or so ...
Then to each people to see if it fits its bills ... | ||||||||||
| arguru | Posted: 6th January 2004 16:59 | |||||||||
That list is not only biased as Dave (Whitenoise) stated, it's also outdated:
Grab latest version at: http://www.discodsp.com/public/vertigo/ Vertigo allows both morph timeline (envelope) and also timestretching envelopes per example. It also features: * Spectrogram editor (user can draw independent partial frequency and amplitude curve along time). (no in CA5000 afaik) * Built-in BMP import allowing any-size, any bit-depth and "bilinearly" interpolating for scaling. (NO in CA5000 afaik, and not using external tool, afaik) * Independent partial panning (No in ca5000 afaik, yes in Cube per example) * 256 partials (64 in ca5000 afaik) I dont want to sound rush, but Ben: less biased featureset next time please. Cube per example allows a zillion of things wich CA5000 just doesnt, same goes for Whitenoise additive synth (ie: WN's timeframed formant filter) Tired Arguru, time to sleep, end of holydays and back to work tomorrow =). | ||||||||||
| Muff Wiggler | Posted: 6th January 2004 18:25 | |||||||||
well I am the real winner here because I bought Vertigo v1.0 when it was $79 and DiscoDSP gives free updates for life
If they were all $79 I'd be an even bigger winner though hehehe..... | ||||||||||
| Muff Wiggler | Posted: 6th January 2004 18:27 | |||||||||
How about a $79 crossgrade Ben  | ||||||||||
| tobyfarley | Posted: 6th January 2004 20:45 | |||||||||
I remember reading years ago in Keyboard magazine that Wendy Carlos was going the way of additive because it is possible to make any sound imaginable. After hearing this I was intriged for years and recent finally got Cube.
Here are my observations of additive so far: 1. I am not Wendy Carlos (I am not Walter Carlos either) 2. I will not live long enough to master additive synthesis (I am 39). 3. I am thankful for for the slot machine option. (It's a sort of monkeys/typewriters/Shakespeare sort of thing, someday I will randomly create a really cool patch) | ||||||||||
| pough | Posted: 6th January 2004 21:21 | |||||||||
Oh, come one. As if he's going to be as familiar with other developers' synths as his own. Besides, he DID ask for people (which includes you) to make suggestions:
But really, the best quote so far is:
I own Cameleon and have been tempted by the others. I tried and liked all the others, too. They all have something to offer. My main problem is my lack of familiarity with synths in general and additive synthesis is particular. I'm fairly lost. Cameleon appealed to me because it has so many great presets and I am already familiar with how good Ben's programming is. | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 7th January 2004 00:06 | |||||||||
I think the table is pretty good and just goes to show each synth has its own strength combing the lot into one synth would be great however where is the image input option on the table? 
I agree the title of the thread is one designed to create interest and views though it becomes very apparent there is in fact no war to be had and if I had the option I would use them all but I do have my favoured synth based on how I work in music and that is Cameleon (for morphing this is king imo) the WhiteNoise one at the moment is great for the image intake and the approach of the whole synth is very unique I think it can take some getting used to and experiments are fun with the images - quite powerful Well there you have Vertigo taking in Loops of no real limit it seems - plus high re-synth quality but not too useable at the top settings (cpu wise) - best to bring it down to the lower levels. What you all need to do - as Normal suggested - is try the demos for each instrument and see how you feel working with them try them and explore their capabilities first hand spend a little bit of time learning the jargon that goes with these instruments and try and 'find' the features on the synth and see how 'easy' it is to implement them it wont take you too long to find the best for - creating music if that is what you are into. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Alex@PA | Posted: 7th January 2004 03:25 | |||||||||
But if you don't find it useful dare you vote 'no' as spe3d will hunt you down like a dog
...only kidding spe3d (why did I feel it necessary to say that)  | ||||||||||
| CypherOne | Posted: 7th January 2004 03:28 | |||||||||
Oh careful PA, I got gunned down yesterday for that (not by Spe3d BTW), well, that and my overuse of smilies....... | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 7th January 2004 03:35 | |||||||||
Careful PA seems like good advice to me
http://www.kvr-vst.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32989 Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Alex@PA | Posted: 7th January 2004 03:40 | |||||||||
Makes a nice change | ||||||||||
| Urs | Posted: 7th January 2004 03:45 | |||||||||
Hehe, dunno if it helps, but Zebra lets you manipulate 127 partials and has a mechanism to intelligently (more or less) generate the lacking 896 partials that are also in the standard waveforms (1024 partials in total)... But of course, Additive Synthesis in Zebra is just an add-on, not its basic purpose
Cheers, Urs | ||||||||||
| Rozzer | Posted: 7th January 2004 04:12 | |||||||||
Whilst the discussion about features is an interesting and valid one, I think one of the biggest factors in choosing an additive synth (or any synth for that matter) is its ease-of-use.
Additive synthesis is not the easiest beast to understand, and as a result I think alot of new users will simply choose the product that makes the most sense to them in the least amount of time. Personally, I tried Chameleon, Cube and Additive (downloading Vertigo now & will try Adder when I get some more time), and I found Additive to be the most understandable of the three. It seems like the perfect starter plugin for anyone wishing to explore additive synthesis. This is no slur on its sound quality. On the contrary, I was up and making complex & beautiful patches within half an hour, which is somthing that definately didn't happen with the other two. Perhaps when I have learned more, and become comfortable with this synthesis method, I will go back and try the others again. Maybe they'll make more sense then. You can have too many features sometimes! </my 2 cents> | ||||||||||
| ageis | Posted: 7th January 2004 06:30 | |||||||||
It would help if there was a windows version
<wow, never thought I'd say that about anything> | ||||||||||
| ttoz | Posted: 7th January 2004 07:23 | |||||||||
i believe there is definitely a windowz version coming...URS, can you confirm?? | ||||||||||
| pschelfh | Posted: 7th January 2004 08:03 | |||||||||
Another thing thing to consider is the size of the resynthesized files. In Vertigo (Demo 1.5) I noticed these where 3 Mb per file!  I don't know if this has changed in the last version?
In Cameleon a resynthesized file is 50 - 150 Kb. If you want to download a commercial or free soundbank with, say 64 patches, this will be 3 - 10 Mb for Cameleon and 192 Mb for Vertigo. I think this is also why Cameleon has the most presets : download size! I don't know what the (resynthsized) filesize is for the other additive synths? Peter. | ||||||||||
| Muff Wiggler | Posted: 7th January 2004 08:12 | |||||||||
If Urs creates a windows version of Zebra, I will most likely buy it, unless it's priced just too high for me. I have registered my MFM and I'm a real believer in the power of U-He, I just wish they were more Windows-friendly | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 7th January 2004 08:18 | |||||||||
Thats a very good point pschelf patch and bank sizes do play a significant part for people to be able to obtain new sounds (particularly if you are on dial up)
Hey! Laser I use and love MFM too true feedback addict and looking forward to more of Urs stuff to be ported to windows. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Alex@PA | Posted: 7th January 2004 09:21 | |||||||||
What did you mean by that? What have I got to be careful about? If you read that thread you have given you'd actually see that I agreed with you....although I am not even sure why you quoted it
And if you read above you'd see I was joking. I even pointed out that it was a joke because I suspected you wouldn't see it that way.
Oh well, I guess it was lost on you | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 7th January 2004 09:36 | |||||||||
PA you have slandered me banned me from your site stopped me communication with you by any means put down in the strongest terms my Controversy site to the point where the only viable option left for me was to close it to protect my other site. You have contributed in the putting down of my name and try to undermine my contributions - Yet you still think you can contribute any worthwhile discussion with me? And now you are putting your hand to a bit of humour?. Well needless to say I am at this point in time not too pleased with you. I can spell it out but I think its a waste of time and effort And as I said some time ago now I cannot be bothered with you any longer get the hint. Have fun, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| pschelfh | Posted: 7th January 2004 09:42 | |||||||||
 
Peter. | ||||||||||
| Poorman | Posted: 7th January 2004 10:44 | |||||||||
As far as I can see, White Noise Additive potentially has the greatest control of partials over time, If there was more control over drawing in the spectral oscillator screen (or alternativelly an independant plug in to create RAW files) then essentially each partial could have its own envelope, or even delay line, or one could even create the equivalent of an LFO on each partial - flipante!
If there was also an independant program to convert wav to raw then it would propably put White Noise to the top of my buy list for an additive synth. | ||||||||||
| Ben [Camel Audio] | Posted: 7th January 2004 11:17 | |||||||||
Hi,
Actually Cameleon and Vertigo have more control over partials than White Noise Additive or Cube. Cameleon has a 128 breakpoint envelope for each partial amplitude envelope, and also a 128 breakpoint envelope for the pitch of each partial. (Its listed as 'freely detunable partials' in the table I made). White Noise Additive does not have any control over the pitch of each partial. The reason why pitch envelopes are useful, is that you cannot resynthesise acoustic instruments well without this, and in general it allows an additive synth to create a wider variety of sounds. (If you wish to hear the difference, try a piano preset (for example) in Cameleon, and see what the effect of turning harmonize on is. Harmonize on is equivalent to having no pitch envelopes). However, as I and many others have said before, the best way to decide which synth to buy is to try the demo and listen to the MP3s and then make a decision on that basis. In addition, there is no reason why you should not buy more than one. Many of you will have several subtractive synths - they all have different strengths and weaknesses. BTW. Arguru - thanks for pointing those features out. I will update the table when Vertigo 2 is released. Thanks Ben | ||||||||||
| Muff Wiggler | Posted: 7th January 2004 11:33 | |||||||||
I think that it's amazing that so many developers are making such cutting edge instruments that we are having trouble keeping track of all these features!
Camel, Disco, Big Tick, VirSyn, White Noise, ConcerteFX, you guys all kick ass in my books (and that's just in this Additive thread - there's no shortage of quality instrument coding going on in subtractive and other areas either...). Thanks for your efforts to bring so many powerful choices to the consumer - the real winner in all of this. Cheers, LG | ||||||||||
| WhiteNoise | Posted: 7th January 2004 11:36 | |||||||||
Yes, Ben's right - there is no detune or phase control on the partials which is why it's not very good at making realistic resynthesized sounds. White Noise Additive is stronger at making new kinds of synthesized sounds rather than realistic sounds, so it really depends more on what kind of sounds you are after. However, you can load .wav files in Additive, which is how the vocoded style sounds were created. | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 7th January 2004 12:32 | |||||||||
I'm looking for the most bizzare abstract evolving pad type sounds as well as harsh scraping horror effects. I am working on a series of halloween cd's. Which additive plug would be best for me? I like the sounds of the White noise plug. Any thoughts | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 7th January 2004 12:34 | |||||||||
Perfect Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| WhiteNoise | Posted: 7th January 2004 13:06 | |||||||||
I think you'll find that White Noise Additive has a lot to offer in the Pad department. Check out the "Hivemind" preset on the web page (http://www.whitenoiseaudio.com/additive) which is one of the better "horrible" sounds | ||||||||||
| Ben [Camel Audio] | Posted: 7th January 2004 14:11 | |||||||||
Hi,
There are a lot of odd sound ambiences and disturbing sounds in the FX section of Cameleon. If you haven't already had a look, its worth taking a look at the demo - although the demo only contain around 50 presets, rather than the 500 or so in the full version. I'll try to put some more FX in the updated demo coming within the next week. Also, I haven't put these up before, because I didn't think they'd appeal to as wide a cross section of people - though they are great tunes (check out http://www.camelaudio.com/productsCA5000.htm for the main demos). But since you asked for eerie and harsher stuff, you might want to check these out, that I just put up for you: http://www.camelaudio.com/sounds/special/GroundZero-by-Vurt.mp3 http://www.camelaudio.com/sounds/special/CameleonDays-by-Biomechanoid. mp3 http://www.camelaudio.com/sounds/special/Caustik_Camel-by-Biomechanoid .mp3 http://www.camelaudio.com/sounds/special/Camel_Acid-by-Biomechanoid.mp 3 These are all made with Cameleon, except I think some of the tunes might use some sampled drums. Ben | ||||||||||
| Dingo865 | Posted: 7th January 2004 14:25 | |||||||||
To up the ante in this lovely competition between our developers in this thread:
I'm no programmer, but I can make some REALLY bizzare abstract type sounds as well as harsh scraping horror noises, especially after the copious consumption of certain food substances! Now, granted, my partial is not big, but it offers a pretty decent time envelope, and under the right circumstances it morphs within a few seconds. It only comes with two presets, but the second (extended) version resynthesizes a flute perfectly... The instrument is not for sale (unless you're a lady between the ages of 18 and 38.), but I'll gladly offer a compilation CD for $19.95 + $99.95 shipping and handling... | ||||||||||
| mayan | Posted: 7th January 2004 14:44 | |||||||||
Damn, Dingo...LOL! It's a good thing I wasn't drinking coffee or it would have been extruded up my nose and onto my office desk. Seems to me that there might be some other sound practitioners who could offer competition. Hmmmm...maybe the subject of another additive "war" thread!! | ||||||||||
| ageis | Posted: 7th January 2004 14:55 | |||||||||
I still think you should get them all. I've been making all sorts of evil by 'adding the additives' in energyXT.
The only difference between Additive and Addictive is one tiny little letter 'c'. | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 7th January 2004 15:04 | |||||||||
In FL Studio I create a layers of instruments like Z3ta+ - then render to wave a pattern of about 16 bars at 43 bpm then I bring this wave into Cronox
The additive synths has helped save me some of this when creating different types of sound though I still mess around with the rendered waves when creating special fx food for thought amazing what can be done with tempo. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 7th January 2004 15:14 | |||||||||
In recap can someone recall my additive options (maybe include links as well). There were some odd ones mentioned I never heard of. Thanks | ||||||||||
| Urs | Posted: 7th January 2004 16:00 | |||||||||
Yeah, hmm, I'd love to say "buy a Mac" but that wouldn't really be helpful
Well, "they" are only "he", and that is the whole problem. I won't get out *complex* software on a platform I don't know a shit about, hence can't support 100%. Maybe "I" becomes "we" in a not too distant future, then things will look different
Stay tuned! I have something more addictive in mind with that zoo stuff... Cheers, Urs | ||||||||||
| Muff Wiggler | Posted: 7th January 2004 16:29 | |||||||||
Hey Urs, no worries, I was only teasing... I actually think it's cool that you and guys like Tom Erbe develop with mainly Apple in mind, as so few audio tools exist on Apple vs. PC. Look at all the options us PC people have It's nuts!
Anyway, IMO you should keep doing what you're doing. The VST Source Archive is a priceless thing to the whole community, your plugins are very nice indeed (Zebra is one of the rare things I'm jealous of apple people for) and the insanely crazy price that I got the insanely crazy MFM from you for makes me your fan for good As long as the odd U-He plugin trickles over to the windows platform once in a while (zebra zebra) anyway...
Cheers... | ||||||||||
| DocT | Posted: 8th January 2004 00:33 | |||||||||
There's another column missing: Most effective advertising on KvR [x]____________[-]____________[--]... Camelaudio_____Competitor1____Co...  | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 8th January 2004 02:08 | |||||||||
It is one of the best marketing campaigns of just about any vsti product released to date and in this instance also for a product worthy of the attention.
Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| bluedad | Posted: 8th January 2004 02:50 | |||||||||
maybe he's referring to adder | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 8th January 2004 02:59 | |||||||||
Hi! Bluedad,
I am referring to the marketing campaign set up by Camel Audio its the way the marketing has been presented here at K-v-R that I thought was pretty cool its the first time ever that I have seen the menu used to promote a completion to win a product plus the moving flash banners are well done if I think of the name the instrument has got plus the job its designed to do - the banners here represent that very well. Combined with a well laid out website that loads fast plus an enthusiastic hands on approach towards questions about his product that and forever trying to improve on what he has already achieved impressed me. Personally I feel that the product is also very good and warrants the promotion I certainly would not be excited about it if I did not feel that way. Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| bluedad | Posted: 8th January 2004 03:02 | |||||||||
I see. Yes, it has been promoted very well. Also, I don't blame you on your enthusiasm; as I dug into Cameleon to try and come up with some presets I was pretty impressed as well. | ||||||||||
| bluedad | Posted: 8th January 2004 03:04 | |||||||||
..but still, adder hasn't been put on the chart!
(lost my train of thought for a moment..) | ||||||||||
| Concretefx | Posted: 8th January 2004 03:10 | |||||||||
Hi there
I'd prefer Adder not to be in the chart. As a traditional additive synth it would look a bit under powered, but in fact Adder can do much more with these limited number of partials . Adder can be though as a 32 osc wavetable synth Cheers Jon : ConcreteFX | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 8th January 2004 03:16 | |||||||||
Ah! Yep! Sorry  I see your point there Bluedad that does need to be addressed as its not fair to Jon, if Adder is not even on the chart.
Its a big risk for a company to set up comparison charts the products are forever being updated and new ones will always come out though with careful attention to detail and responsive action from users input this table should be of benefit to many.
I think when Ben of Camel reads what you have put he will add Adder to the chart.
Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 8th January 2004 03:18 | |||||||||
I took to long writing Jon, still the price of your product puts you in a strong position for the chart not everyone can afford high priced stuff food for thought.
Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Rabid | Posted: 8th January 2004 04:15 | |||||||||
Using Cameleon5000 here. I have not checked out Adder yet thought I own three other synths by ConcreteFX. I notice no one has posted a review on Adder.
Robert | ||||||||||
| mayan | Posted: 8th January 2004 06:15 | |||||||||
I just spent a couple of days trying out the Adder demo and in a moment of blinding, impulsive flush immediately forgot all budgetary vows and bought it. It's a great synth and -as with the other additives - incredibly addictive. Sounds great and its wonderful to be able to shape sounds while playing havoc with the partials, etc. Still getting under the very l-a-r-g-e hood of the program. When I get more comfortable with its features, I'll try to post a review.
I am a firm believer in the "soul" of the machine and -although I don't know my ass from my elbow regarding additive sound building- really feel that Camel, WhiteNoise Additive and Adder all have something different to offer by way of approach, feel and sound. In fact, I think I'm personally supporting the additive synth industry and have set my eyes toward Vertigo which also seems incredibly sweet but -at first glance in the wee hours - seemed quite a bit more CPU intensive than the others. (oh why oh why did the Deities of Budget lead me to this site and then strip my dignity with Share-It? A sense of humor perhaps). One more thing I note...a cursory glance shows that none of the aforsesaid additive synths are represented in the patch bank here...not sure about Patch Arena. Maybe its time for the practitioners and devotees to start showing the subtactives where its at? | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 8th January 2004 06:27 | |||||||||
I am working on it I have the image side of things worked out here http://www.dspevo.net/English/frames.html and currently doing re synthesis patches with permission of some very well established original content authors ok! Extreme difference in sound from the original samples but they will show a personality of their own each sample provider will be given full display of my gratitude at my sites when the patches are released plus mentioned in the patch distribution. Look out for it when they are announced its going to be a great time for all I am also working on some RM4 banks too Best regards, Spe3d :O) | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 8th January 2004 06:30 | |||||||||
Oh! And if you are an original content provider and wish to contribute some genuine original samples to the project but have not had an email for me inviting you to this idea please contact me.
Advertising will be provided in return at both of my sites. Best regards, Spe3d | ||||||||||
| Markleford | Posted: 8th January 2004 06:55 | |||||||||
I also think Adder is very cool and unique! I agree that it doesn't belong on that list: it's a different beast that deserves its own category.
- m | ||||||||||
| Concretefx | Posted: 8th January 2004 07:07 | |||||||||
Hi there
I'm glad that people are finding Adder fun to use, if anyone want to post a review of it (or any our software) that would be great . Similarly if any one has any patches they would like to share I'd put them on our website
Hopefully in the next couple of weeks, there will be an updated version of Adder .In developing our next synth I'v had quite few new ideas which I can put into Adder to make it more powerful and easier to use Cheers Jon : ConcreteFX Jon : ConcreteFX | ||||||||||
| pschelfh | Posted: 8th January 2004 07:43 | |||||||||
All these synths are relatively new, so it might take some time before the first soundbanks pop up. I'm currently working on an FM soundbank for Cameleon and hope to finish by the end of this month. Sounds seem to take on a new character in Cameleon and I can say that most sound better than their FM counterparts once they're inside Cameleon ! Peter. | ||||||||||
| mayan | Posted: 8th January 2004 09:12 | |||||||||
That's great to hear about your endeavors. I look forward to checking 'em out.
It's interesting that you say that...I'm not sure I have the ears or the experience to know myself but I'm interested in whether people can "hear" a difference between additive and subtractive - or whether they are two different ways at achieving the same type end-sound? Also, I have been wrestling with my gear-lust and budget and agree to some extent with the sentiment that more choices (hundreds of thousands of patches and effects - all mine!!! hahahahahaha) can "dilute" the creative process - OTOH, there is something about each one of the new additives which seem to stimulate different types of creative sound building and correlative music making for me. I don't know whether its the "newness" of the medium or what but each instrument really gets my juices flowing in different ways. And anything that stimulates and fosters the creative process is to be cherished, eh? (My new rationale for explaining the credit card bill to my long suffering spouse.) | ||||||||||
| Poorman | Posted: 8th January 2004 09:50 | |||||||||
Ben, if you're around, I've had another quick look at the Cameleon demo and manual and I can't yet see how to get a seperate envelope set up for each partial. I've read the Breakpoints and Overall Modes section and can see how using breakpoint mode I can set a different set of partials for each breakpoint, but it's not quite the same as setting an envelope for each partial (even though it may effectively be the same, it would be cumbersome to work out each partial set for each breakpoint in terms of representing the sum of groups of individual partial envelopes, I hope you see what I mean!) If there is another way to do it could you just tell me under which heading it comes in the manual. Thanks. | ||||||||||
| pough | Posted: 8th January 2004 10:11 | |||||||||
Ben will be out of touch for a while, as he has had a family emergency. | ||||||||||
| pschelfh | Posted: 8th January 2004 10:13 | |||||||||
Poorman, Ben can't respond right now due to a tragic accident in his family (see Camel Audio Forum). I'll try to help.
I think Cameleon only lets you change the partials for each breakpoint this way. You can change the partials one by one or group them (fifhts, octaves, bright, dark) if you select 'Harmonics'-mode. This can give nice results if you eg. select the internal saw wave, leave the first breakpoint like it is, change the 'dark'-setting for the second breakpoint, change the 'octave'-setting for the third breakpoint, etc... You can make nice evolving sweeps like this! Peter. | ||||||||||
| trentpmcd | Posted: 8th January 2004 17:58 | |||||||||
Im new here and to VSTi, but I have used additive I bought a used K-5 in 90 and a K-5000 a few years later.
Last night, after reading this thread, I downloaded a few of demos and was impressed. Vertigo was the easiest for me to use with my Kawai additive background it made a lot of sense. I was also very impressed with Adder. Theres a lot going on there. It has how many LFOs? And every thing can be modulated with everything in something like 64 different mod routings. Is it a 32 operator FM synth, a 32 oscillator wave table synth or a an additive that can use sampled waveforms as partials? Whatever, its great, and I havent even thought of looking at the step sequencer yet. To answer an earlier question, I think with Chameleon being able to put a different value (both amplitude and pitch) at 256 break points for every partial is pretty much the same as having a 256 segment envelope for each of them. Thats my interpretation anyway. Unfortunately, I wasnt as successful making the sounds I wanted with Chameleon as I was with Vertigo. On a similar subject, Ive been having a blast with microTera. Its gotten me used to thinking in additive terms again. It's worth the price of a magazine. I love additive so it looks like I'm starting into VSTi at just the right time. | ||||||||||
| bluedad | Posted: 8th January 2004 18:41 | |||||||||
hey, it's a great time indeed! | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 8th January 2004 23:19 | |||||||||
I've been trying the demos as well. How come vertigo doesn't come with any patch examples? (there is one bit map, but no presets). I really like Additive, but it is a little cpu hungry. | ||||||||||
| CreepJoint | Posted: 8th January 2004 23:34 | |||||||||
Hi lsd,
sounds like you downloaded the beta of version 2. Go get the demo of the release version for some presets. | ||||||||||
| Tronam | Posted: 9th January 2004 07:52 | |||||||||
Because the "demo" of Vertigo you've downloaded is actually a 2.0 beta and doesn't allow patch loading/saving. Download the real demo of Vertigo 1.5 from their website. That includes 16 presets and will give you a really good idea of the kinds of sounds it's capable of. It's brilliant, in my opinion. -Tronam | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 9th January 2004 08:28 | |||||||||
Version 1.5 doesn't allow the bit map feature. I am torn between Vertigo and Additive. Any thoughts? | ||||||||||
| normal | Posted: 9th January 2004 09:06 | |||||||||
if you are not in any particular hurry ,
perhaps you should wait a bit ... as a Vertigo owner , i am of course a bit biased , but the final release of Vertigo2 may be of interest ... nought wrong with any of the others though ... i might add that Cfx has a very underrated piece of soft w/ Adder ... capable of some serious sound design , and quite affordable ... Jon is reknowned for first-class support ... re: cpu ... directly related to number of partials used ... i'm making some interesting sounds utilizing from 64 to 128 partials that are quite cpu efficient ... | ||||||||||
| dougsyo | Posted: 9th January 2004 09:49 | |||||||||
To be honest, I haven't quite figured out the value of the bitmap feature - it just strikes me as another form of randomizer for setting the partials - not unlike the "slot machine" for MicroTera. I don't know that I would base my decision on that... but I don't know about your host (or Vertigo's) other randomizing options. Doug | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 9th January 2004 10:28 | |||||||||
I am really torn between vertigo and additive. What would make you buy one over the other? I have demo'd them and like them both, but can afford only one. | ||||||||||
| Tronam | Posted: 9th January 2004 23:02 | |||||||||
I think I know why this might be. Have you noticed that every single one of the presets in Vertigo are the exact same size... 1559kb. Every custom patch that I create is even larger at exactly 3113kb in size, which initially led me to believe that it was storing my sample in there somewhere. But, the documentation clearly states that once the sample has been analyzed and the partials model constructed, the PCM data is discarded. So, what is taking up all of that space and how is Cameleon managing to get it's patches down to such a small size? I think it's because Vertigo saves it's patches as raw, uncompressed data, while Cameleon incorporates a built-in compression system for it's patches. Guess how small my 3113kb patches get compressed down to with a simple .ZIP compression program? 155kb. With my Vertigo_Data folder already beyond 100MB at this point with just a few of my own patches, I think DiscoDSP should seriously consider at least a simple .ZIP compression/decompression scheme for it's saved presets in Vertigo 2.0. A 2000% reduction in size is worth it, I think. My VST folder is taking up enough hard drive space as it is.
-Tronam | ||||||||||
| Markleford | Posted: 10th January 2004 07:57 | |||||||||
Having built a tool for the voice-patch format, I can say with certainty that Cameleon does not use any sort of compression. - m | ||||||||||
| Tronam | Posted: 10th January 2004 09:51 | |||||||||
Well, that was presumptuous on my part then. But, just to be certain that there is no confusion, I was not implying that Cameleon compromises it's sound quality in any way through compression. It was just a hypothesis that possibly a lossless compression algorithm like .ZIP was being used to keep the patches so small. Perhaps Cameleon simply throws away all of the data that it doesn't need, whereas Vertigo holds onto a whole lot more. Either way, I definitely think that Vertigo's method of storage needs some improvement in this respect. A basic data compression scheme would make all of the difference. -Tronam | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 10th January 2004 10:02 | |||||||||
Ummm! I dont think this is accurate either Tronam one synth is 64 partials the other is 256 neither synth is throwing away data they both utilise the data that is considered important to be saved in the patch while other data may be already in the synth itself.
Best regards, | ||||||||||
| Tronam | Posted: 10th January 2004 10:13 | |||||||||
Hmm... I think this is exactly what I said. I specifically said that it "throws away all of the data that it doesn't need" and that Vertigo holds onto a lot more. Considering that Vertigo stores information for 256 possible partials, instead of 64, is it not accurate to say that it "holds onto a lot more" data? Are you suggesting that after both instruments import a PCM waveform, no data is thrown away? Vertigo's documentation states that it does and I would imagine that Cameleon does as well. Once they build their impression of the sample, there's probably no need to hang onto any of that data any longer. This isn't really the point anyways. What's most relevant I think, is that considering how well the Vertigo patches compress, I'd really like to see something like that in the next version. I can see my VST folder growing exponentially, the more I use it. It's already happening..
-Tronam | ||||||||||
| Muff Wiggler | Posted: 10th January 2004 10:23 | |||||||||
hmm sort of a non-answer Tronam (I'd like the see native compression within vertigo patches too....), and a little obvious but...
I keep all my VST patches on a seperate drive, thus maximizing space for my VST plugins (I create and save tons and tons of patches all the time for all my plugins). All the best, LG | ||||||||||
| Spe3D | Posted: 10th January 2004 10:23 | |||||||||
Tronam I am suggesting keeping the info simple like
1 a patch from a synth with 64 partials is naturally going to be smaller than.. 2 a patch from a synth with 256 partials that will be bigger. How the syths manage this data is the key to trying the demos and hear for yourself the quality from both combined with playability.
Both Vertigo and Cameleon have strong benefits each to be honest they are additives but their strengths lay in different areas.
And yep! This is the danger = big vst folders full of synths no one synth in the additive ranges has yet to cover all of the others features (that I know of)
Best regards, Spe3d | ||||||||||
| Tronam | Posted: 10th January 2004 11:00 | |||||||||
I already own Vertigo and have been extremely happy with it overall. What initially caught my attention though was the mention of how incredibly small Cameleon's patches were in comparison and I was naturally curious as to the reasons behind this. It may have fewer partials, thus only needing to store 1/4th as much data, but we're talking a 20-30 times difference here. I'm sure something could be done to address that. Either way, if I'm crazy enough to stockpile nearly 20gb of MP3's on my hard drive, surely I can sequester some space for my damned Vertigo patches.
-Tronam | ||||||||||
| spaceman | Posted: 11th January 2004 09:23 | |||||||||
Vertigo is good but it just doesn't sound as good as CUBE. For me the best sounding softsynths (overall even) are CUBE, Absynth and Reaktor... this trio is in a league of their own what sound quality is concerned.
But since this is a discussion about additive synths, my vote will go to CUBE (with Bigtick's Rhino in second place) | ||||||||||
| Tronam | Posted: 11th January 2004 13:44 | |||||||||
I haven't actually heard Cube at all yet. But, on your recommendation I'll have to check it out. Thanks. -Tronam | ||||||||||
| lsd | Posted: 11th January 2004 14:34 | |||||||||
I have Cube but think it lacks something, sound wise. Maybe it's the presets that don't do it justice, but they seem rather dull. That is why I started this thread. I have tried some of the other options and I really like Additive it has lots of character. The sound jumps out at you and is very "colorful". Vertigo is good as well. I don't have the patience to program from scratch so maybe I need to spend more time with Cube? | ||||||||||
| WhiteNoise | Posted: 11th January 2004 21:31 | |||||||||
Cube kinda sucks in my opinion - all the sounds sound similar and it's difficult to get the kinds of sounds you want. It has some novel ways of doing things like the 4 way morphing thing and the morph paths (which since has been adopted by chameleon), but I found it difficult to get really fat sounds. Everything sounds kinda thin. It's a great synth for ambient stuff, but for anything that requires a more aggressive or thick sound it's too dull. | ||||||||||
| spaceman | Posted: 12th January 2004 04:39 | |||||||||
It probably depends on how you define 'fat sound' WhiteNoise. It's not supposed to be a fat sounding analogue synth (you have to turn to other synths for that) but CUBE is very capable of producing very rich and extremely clear sounds.. but I might agree with you in the way that it does have a very distinct sound that might not appeal to everyone.
I'm into ambient music (style Global Communication, etc.) and I'm looking for clear, organic, evolving (weird) sounds and I don't like 'muddy' sounds that much so CUBE is perfect for me (and for me it's also the perfect companion for Absynth, which gives me the 'fat' sounds you mentioned.) .. but might I also repeat that Bigtick's Rhino is becoming one of my favs as well. Tremendous quality and possibilities for the price. | ||||||||||
| pd | Posted: 12th January 2004 07:17 | |||||||||
I own Cube, Cameleon, and Vertigo. They all have top quality sound. Each one offers sounds that would be impossible or extremely difficult to create with the others.
Cube ($199) ----------- - Excellent selection of presets. These will not be to everyone's liking but if you are into a different kind of innovative sound, these are great. - Best rhythmic looping kind of sounds. - Best GUI. Great fun watching the 2d envelope animation. I love watching the filters mo |
KVR Audio is the Internet's number one news and information resource for open standard audio plugins. We report new releases, product announcements and product updates (major and minor) for all VST Plugins, DirectX Plugins and Audio Units Plugins. We manage a fully searchable audio plugin database (updated daily), and offer many free member services including user reviews, product update notifications and a very active discussion forum. We also host official support forums for many plugin developers plus the official Receptor support forum.
Google Powered Search:
KVR Powered Plug-in Search: